PBEM Mod: Suggestion Thread

[snoopy369]

Okay, this is where you make suggestions! Please state the problem you see, the reasons it's a problem, and the possible solutions you see. If you don't see any solutions as yet, that's fine - but no proposal can be made without a solution.

[Rommel2D]

I think we should begin the suggestions here and only move to a seperate thread if the discussion here warrants it. That sounds like what you had in mind snoop, but this thread is empty and the mod threads are about to push themselves off the first page. The forum is starting to look like it did pre-split.

[snoopy369]

lol, ok I wanted to have certain threads out there, particularly certain issues that were very likely to come up, either from the earlier thread or otherwise ... but what you say makes sense. If it gets active enough I suppose MarkG will set up a forum for it (like AU has), but until that point we should ... consolidate ...

[Rommel2D]

How about a simple goal to start with: determine the best 7 (5?) changes by a set date (end of Jan?), and make version one of the mod with those?

[punkbass2000]

Sounds like a very good idea, and apprehends my fear that nothing useful will occur by this mod before Civ4 is released (at least partially, anyway).

[conmcb25]

Make it so names of Civ's can be changed in game.

[Rommel2D]

Was that request directed at the mod panel or at Santa Claus?

[Paddy]

ahhh maybe either SnoopCat or Rommel could link all the various threads in one of the two opening posts

keep this as a control thread...

then Rommel, as the Moderator, you could also adjust the thread name to state that this is the control thread etc for these mod issues

then Rommel, as the Moderator, you could also top the thread

just a suggestion, incase it is not being done in another thread

Originally posted by snoopy369
Okay, this is where you make suggestions! Please state the problem you see, the reasons it's a problem, and the possible solutions you see. If you don't see any solutions as yet, that's fine - but no proposal can be made without a solution.

ok, lets see if I have this right...

problem: too many threads
proposal: list of links to all the threads in opening posts, making this a control thread. And then having this thread topped
solution: we have a general thread, here, with links to all of the on topic issues etc, so we know where to go for the many more in depth discussions etc


ahh it is all good

[Paddy]

Hello

is there anyone out there???

[Rommel2D]

Being in the alcohol business, I hope you can imagine this is a busy week for us.

Year-end quota-meeting sales will spill over for a few weeks yet, so I won't have much spare time until the end of January...

[Paddy]

oh well said old chap

yes well said indeed

Here, have a beer.

woo hoo


/me seen heading for the cellars with a few beer jugs

[Rommel2D]

Actually, I'm already sampling that Black Label grape juice you've previously recommended...

[snoopy369]

lol you folk are funny

[Rommel2D]

From the Small Wonders, Big Wonders thread, the suggestion was made that Scientific Great Leaders are the most imbalancing part of the Great Wonder situation. Since SGLs can be disabled from the start-up screen, there is no need to eliminate them with a mod.

However, simply eliminating SGLs takes away a perk from scientific tribes. If it were decided that the GW issue would be best solved by disabling SGLs, we might consider compensating the scientific trait somehow.

Alternatively, as was mentioned in the other thread, the rush capability of SGLs could be reduced to that of an MGL. This would hurt the sci trait also, albeit to a lesser degree...

[snoopy369]

And would help the Sci. trait to a large extent - because almost nobody plays with SGLs in PBEM right now...

[alexman]

I just got some time to sit down and somewhat organize my thoughts on the PBEM mod. So in my opinion, a PBEM mod needs to accomplish the following:

1. Reduce the effect of random events on the outcome of the game. The goal is to avoid situations where the winner is determined by luck, rather than by skill. This category includes dealing with the effect of Leaders (Scientific), resource scarcity (strategic) and resource-dependent Wonders (Statue of Zeus), as well as civilization traits (Agricultural) and unique units (Enkidu, Keshik, Conquistador, Chasqui) for random civ games.
2. Reduce the number of ‘no-brainer’ strategies. The goal is to increase strategic options available to all players by balancing units, improvements, and governments. This category includes units such as Cavalry, Modern Armor, the Helicopter, the Privateer, and Modern Paratroopers, improvements such as the Colosseum and the Coastal Fortress, Wonders like Longevity, Cure for Cancer, and the Oracle, as well as most governments.
3. Increase the significance of military tactics: The goal is to take advantage of the lack of AI to make post-railroad military operations more than just a clash of two huge stacks of units. This category includes dealing with the infinite movement granted by railroads, as well as the possibility of adding the wheeled property to mechanized units. However, these are drastic changes that might be out of the scope of a conservative mod.

As an aside, I do not believe in making a PBEM mod that assumes that the game will be shorter in length than the single player version. While that assumption may hold true for online play, I don’t think it is correct for PBEM.

As a starting point, I will humbly submit some proposed rule modifications to address the above issues for the PBEM mod some time soon.

[snoopy369]

My thoughts on your well organized thoughts (which conveniently taught me something about using vB code! )

Originally posted by alexman
Reduce the effect of random events on the outcome of the game. The goal is to avoid situations where the winner is determined by luck, rather than by skill. This category includes dealing with the effect of Leaders (Scientific), resource scarcity (strategic) and resource-dependent Wonders (Statue of Zeus), as well as civilization traits (Agricultural) and unique units (Enkidu, Keshik, Conquistador, Chasqui) for random civ games.

I think basically all of these are already in progress (although the UU concern is sort of the opposite of our current approach, and a valid one to consider).

Reduce the number of ‘no-brainer’ strategies. The goal is to increase strategic options available to all players by balancing units, improvements, and governments. This category includes units such as Cavalry, Modern Armor, the Helicopter, the Privateer, and Modern Paratroopers, improvements such as the Colosseum and the Coastal Fortress, Wonders like Longevity, Cure for Cancer, and the Oracle, as well as most governments.

This hasn't been our approach so far - because it's a bit more complicated thinking than we've begun with. I see this tactic, that of increasing the number of valid strategies, as very important to a successful PBEM mod. PBEM players, who often play 20 or more games (Paddy, anyone? ) will get bored quickly if they play each game the same way - and with the stock game, you pretty much have to.

I suggest discussing approaches like this in a chat - more in the next post.

Increase the significance of military tactics: The goal is to take advantage of the lack of AI to make post-railroad military operations more than just a clash of two huge stacks of units. This category includes dealing with the infinite movement granted by railroads, as well as the possibility of adding the wheeled property to mechanized units. However, these are drastic changes that might be out of the scope of a conservative mod.

Like in my last comment, I disagree that this is out of our scope. It may be something we address later, in something beyond v1.0 of the mod, but it is certainly appropriate to consider ways in which to make military tactics more interesting and varied in scope; it's in fact a specific branch of your second approach, that of increasing strategic options (just the more tactical version). You bring up two things that come up often, and are certainly worth considering; I'm sure there are others, although I'm having a hard time thinking of something at the moment...

As an aside, I do not believe in making a PBEM mod that assumes that the game will be shorter in length than the single player version. While that assumption may hold true for online play, I don’t think it is correct for PBEM.

I disagree. While some PBEMs (such as PTWDG1) may make it to the later stages of the game, that is the only one I've ever seen that had no AIs in it. I do not suggest making a mod that harms the later stages of the game - but if there are changes to the game that can help make more early games fun and not significantly take away from late games, I feel we would be in error to not make those changes.

I'd also throw a fourth "category" in to your three.

1. 4. Make the game more fun. This would include making changes to elements of SP that are there to allow the AI more of a chance, but are unnecessary and less fun for an all-human contest - such as pushing map trading etc. later in the game - as well as adding in things that would increase interest in the game (without making a drastic change).

(edit: Drat! Doing [ list=4 ] doesn't start it at 4, so I have to cheat!)

[Rommel2D]

Originally posted by snoopy369
And would help the Sci. trait to a large extent - because almost nobody plays with SGLs in PBEM right now...

I'm not sure where you get this from- I've seen it discussed before, but the resolution has always been not to nerf scientific tribes. As far as I can recall, every game I'm in or have set up (IC) has SGLs enabled.

[Rommel2D]

Originally posted by alexman

1. Reduce the effect of random events on the outcome of the game.
2. Reduce the number of ‘no-brainer’ strategies.
3. Increase the significance of military tactics: ... However, these are drastic changes that might be out of the scope of a conservative mod.

I wholeheartedly agree with #1. PBEMs are a significant investment of a person's time- having a game that's been played for months determined by a fluke event would be highly disappointing.

The #2 issues I don't see much imperative to. Red herring units/buildings/governments are fine by me. If something doesn't get used, no harm done. Perhaps someone will figure out a surprising application for some seemingly useless aspect of the game to turn the tables on a more conventional thinker. If it is a matter of some overpowering aspect, then it becomes a random/imbalance issue.

Along the lines of what I stated in a previous post, I don't see the changes you propose for #3 necessarily too drastic. My view is that in the interest of making the mod easy to remember from turn-to-turn, we should be conservative in the quantity, but not the scope of, any changes. Do you have a suggestion on how to get around the hard-coded infinite movement RRs?

[Rommel2D]

As an aside, I do not believe in making a PBEM mod that assumes that the game will be shorter in length than the single player version. While that assumption may hold true for online play, I don’t think it is correct for PBEM.

Considering the continued support for the Civ2 forums, I would agree that we can count on Civ3 PBEM to be around long enough to make long-term games viable. I assume you would like to improve game balance in order to help promote this?

I just hope you don't consider moving up diplomatic options as superfluous- I recall that map trading (and something else...?) was pushed back at some point purely to enhance SP games with the AI. My thought here is that bringing in diplo options earlier will encourage longer games by making them more interesting at an earlier stage...

[Paddy]

Originally posted by Rommel2D

I'm not sure where you get this from- I've seen it discussed before, but the resolution has always been not to nerf scientific tribes. As far as I can recall, every game I'm in or have set up (IC) has SGLs enabled.

I too am in a few games, well most I believe, that have SGLs enabled

not sure whether I am allowed to comment in these sacred threads

[Rommel2D]

Originally posted by Paddy the Scot
not sure whether I am allowed to comment in these sacred threads

Anyone willing to make the proper sacrifice is of course welcome here. Please send however many litres of McGuigan vino you feel appropriate to the address I have PMed you...

[Paddy]

Originally posted by Rommel2D

Anyone willing to make the proper sacrifice is of course welcome here. Please send however many litres of McGuigan vino you feel appropriate to the address I have PMed you...

thank you Lord

your shipment is has been processed and is inward bound as you read this

[Rommel2D]

Originally posted by snoopy369
PBEM players, who often play 20 or more games (Paddy, anyone? ) will get bored quickly if they play each game the same way - and with the stock game, you pretty much have to.

I don't see a lack of strategic options in the stock rules that would lead to a dead end in playability. Look at simple games like chess and go- how long did they survive as viable strategic games with simple sets of rules? With good aesthetics and play balance, strategies will develop to a suitable level of subtlety.

[It is very disturbing to consider, however, that one day a descendant of Deep Blue will be able to beat alexman on equal footing... ]

[punkbass2000]

"The #2 issues I don't see much imperative to. Red herring units/buildings/governments are fine by me. If something doesn't get used, no harm done. Perhaps someone will figure out a surprising application for some seemingly useless aspect of the game to turn the tables on a more conventional thinker. If it is a matter of some overpowering aspect, then it becomes a random/imbalance issue."

I don't mean to speak for alexman, but I believe you've mis-understood the idiom, 'no-brainer'. IT does not refer to not habing a brain or some such, and building "useless" things, it rather means "obvious" strategies that almost must be used in order to have a chance against everyone else, who's using them. An extreme example would be RCP; if you didn't use it, you were taking a serious disadvantage vs. your opponents.

[Rommel2D]

I don't see how to compare RCP to this situation- it isn't in the game anymore and isn't something we could have affected when it was. Looking at the examples listed, alexman seems to be talking about mostly underused units/improvements/wonders, and a few overpowered ones. I'm just saying I like the flavor of the game to include improvements that don't yeild as great a return as others, and units that have very limited applications. Would you consider, presuming you know baseball, changing the rules to make suicide squeeze bunts a regular occurance because they are too rare?

I think the best example of 'no-brainer' strategy is bee-lining Philosophy. For the AU it makes sense to address this because the AI cannot adopt a strategy to take advantage and SP games become more boring because of this. But in PBEM everyone is pretty well aware of the benefits of this strategy, so it becomes a contest with a suitable risk/reward cost to it. If you try for it and fail, you've wasted research on relatively useless techs, while other players that have math, ironworking, or HBR will benefit more immediately by trading with the player that beat you out.

Nerfing Republic would be a good idea if it will bring other governments into play, but I'd have to be convinced any units/improvements/Wonders need to be modified along these lines. (Not counting SoZ ;-)

[alexman]

Originally posted by Rommel2D

I don't see a lack of strategic options in the stock rules that would lead to a dead end in playability. Look at simple games like chess and go- how long did they survive as viable strategic games with simple sets of rules? With good aesthetics and play balance, strategies will develop to a suitable level of subtlety.

[It is very disturbing to consider, however, that one day a descendant of Deep Blue will be able to beat alexman on equal footing... ]

Yes, chess has simple rules, but the strategic options involved are countless. That's why two games are almost never the same, even though they start from the same map, with no RNG involved.

By contrast, in civ3, even with the RNG involved, the DAR of the best players in AU games are remarkably similar. A strategy game is not a strategy game if there is only one correct strategy. That's why I propose a basic unit, improvement, and government balance as part of a MP mod. This goal is clearly not as important as reducing the effect of random events, but it it essential for interesting gameplay, IMHO.

Bring on Deep Blue!

[alexman]

Originally posted by Rommel2D
I think the best example of 'no-brainer' strategy is bee-lining Philosophy.

As you mentioned, it is a no-brainer only in single player, because you are virtually assured of getting it first. In MP, it is definitely not a no-brainer. Instead it is a gamble, because only one player is going to get the benefit.

[punkbass2000]

Originally posted by Rommel2D
I don't see how to compare RCP to this situation- it isn't in the game anymore and isn't something we could have affected when it was. Looking at the examples listed, alexman seems to be talking about mostly underused units/improvements/wonders, and a few overpowered ones. I'm just saying I like the flavor of the game to include improvements that don't yeild as great a return as others, and units that have very limited applications. Would you consider, presuming you know baseball, changing the rules to make suicide squeeze bunts a regular occurance because they are too rare?

I think the best example of 'no-brainer' strategy is bee-lining Philosophy. For the AU it makes sense to address this because the AI cannot adopt a strategy to take advantage and SP games become more boring because of this. But in PBEM everyone is pretty well aware of the benefits of this strategy, so it becomes a contest with a suitable risk/reward cost to it. If you try for it and fail, you've wasted research on relatively useless techs, while other players that have math, ironworking, or HBR will benefit more immediately by trading with the player that beat you out.

Nerfing Republic would be a good idea if it will bring other governments into play, but I'd have to be convinced any units/improvements/Wonders need to be modified along these lines. (Not counting SoZ ;-)

Quite right. Very sorry, rereading both yours and alexman's posts I slightly misinterpreted things. Correcting by virtue of making "useless" builds better is exactly what you were both describing.

BTW, I meant RCP as archaic example of an exploit that has already been fixed.

[alexman]

Here is a mod I think would serve as a good starting point. Note that many of the changes are carried over from discussions on the AU mod:

To reduce the effect of random events:

• Always play with Scientific leaders turned off. The scientific golden age does not work anyway. To compensate for the loss to the Scientific trait, flag Copernicus’ Observatory as a Scientific Wonder. Scientific civs often have to delay their GA until the end of the Middle Ages if they miss the Great Library.
• Increase the appearance ratio of strategic resources to pre-C3C levels. Luxury resources should remain at C3C levels, so Temples and Cathedrals (and the Religious trait) remain important. An increase to higher levels than in PTW is not necessary, as humans are more resourceful than the AI and can often share a single resource.
• Change Ivory to be a strategic resource, with appearance ratio of 160 (the same as Iron and Horses). That way the resource needed for the Statue of Zeus will be scattered all over the map instead of being clustered in one location. Change Tobacco into a luxury resource, to keep the total number of luxury resources constant at eight.
• Increase Settler cost to 35 shields for Agricultural civilizations. The extra food from the center tile means that you need a food surplus of just 4 per turn from the rest of the tiles to set up a 4-turn Settler pump, which frees your Agricultural citizens to work some high production/low food tiles to get the necessary production for 30 shields in time. By increasing the shield cost of the Settler for Agricultural civs, it sometimes becomes necessary to sacrifice some food to get more shields in order to get the required production for a Settler pump. You might have to mine a plains tile instead of irrigating it, or use a forest tile instead of a grassland tile, for example. That would push the food surplus back to the levels of non-Agricultural civs.
• Increase cost of Enkidu Warrior to 15 shields. The cost-effectiveness of the Sumerian UU is deadly in MP.
• Add zero-range bombard strength of 2 to the Keshik. With a reduced defensive strength, the Mongol UU can't attack as effectively without defensive support, so it has to advance more cautiously. As a result, the Mongols are rarely picked in MP over the Zulu, who have the same traits but a much more powerful UU.
• Increase defensive strength of Conquistador to 3. Conquistadors are supposed to be good for pillaging deep inside enemy lines, but their high cost and low defense rarely makes that strategy worthwhile.
• Reduce cost of Chasqui Scout to 15 shields. This unit is worse than a Chariot for combat because of its upgrade path, and worse than a Scout for exploring because of its double cost.
• For a strengthening of Cossacks and a weakening of Sipahi, see the changes to Cavalry, below.

To reduce the number of ‘no-brainer’ strategies:

• Reduce attack strength of Cavalry to 5 and rename to Light Cavalry.
  Add a new unit, Heavy Cavalry (6-3-3), which is identical to Light Cavalry but with greater attack strength, and requires Nationalism.
  Heavy Cavalry is not available to Russians or Ottomans.
  Reduce attack of Sipahi by 1.
  A large proportion of Civ3 games effectively end with a beeline to Military Tradition because Cavalry is so much better than any offensive unit available until that time.
• Reduce defense of Modern Armor to 14. Modern Armor is the best ground unit in the game. Its high attack and defense encourage players to follow the one-dimensional strategy of building exclusively Modern Armor as their ground units. You get almost the same defensive value as Mechanized Infantry, but with awesome attack capabilities.
• Privateer does not require support. This unit's sole purpose is to attack undefended transport ships, costs as much as a Galleon, but has less than a 50-50 chance of victory against either a Caravel or a Galleon.
• Marines upgrade to Modern Paratroopers.
  Increase attack of Modern Paratroopers to 12.
  Add stealth attack (versus all units except leaders, air, and naval) to Modern Paratroopers.
  Add amphibious ability to Modern Paratroopers.
  Rename Modern Paratroopers to Special Forces.
  This unit is very weak for its position in the tech tree and its cost.
• Remove lethal land bombard from Bombers.
  Give Helicopters bombard strength 6, ROF 3.
  Reduce Helicopter defense to 1.
  Give Helicopters lethal land bombard.
  Bombers are too powerful, especially against players without flight. Helicopters are a rarely-used unit, and Advanced Flight is a rarely-researched optional technology.
• Colosseums increase luxury output by 50%. Colosseums cost as much as two full-price Temples to build and maintain, but produce half as much culture and don't allow Cathedrals like Temples do. Their cost is prohibitive for an ancient city build. Even with the luxury scarcity in C3C, Colosseums are one of the least built city improvements.
• Increase Bombardment defense of Coastal Fortress to 32.
  Increase bombardment strength of Battleship to 12.
  Coastal Fortresses do not serve their purpose of protecting a city from naval bombardment, especially since it’s so easy to avoid the shots from their ZOC. They are the least often built city improvement in Civ3.
• Changed required technology for Longevity to Sanitation. Reduced cost to 800 shields. This Wonder does not provide the builder with a noticeable advantage because it comes at a time when most cities have already reached their maximum size, so they do not benefit from double population growth.
• Increased happy faces for Cure for Cancer to 3. This Wonder does not provide the builder with a noticeable advantage because with it comes at a time when most cities have marketplaces and access to multiple luxuries, so a single happy citizen rarely makes a difference.
• Reduced cost for Oracle to 200 shields. This is one of the weakest Wonders in the game.
• Add free unit support to Democracy, equal to that of the Republic (1/3/4). Democracy is supposed to be a superior peace time government choice to the Republic, but it is rarely worth the switch, even for religious civilizations, especially when unit support for the Republic is close to the free limit.
• Move Secret Police HQ from Communism to Fascism. Communism is overpowered with the C3C corruption model. By contrast, Fascism is virtually worthless.
• Reduce corruption for Feudalism to minimal. This is a small change designed to make Feudalism more often used, and also the Religious trait a little more powerful.

Drastic measures to increase the significance of military tactics:

• Add wheeled property to Artillery, Radar Artillery, Tank, Mechanized Infantry, Modern Armor, Panzer. Wheeled mechanized units and artillery units add some depth to military tactics. Special forces become the strongest units in mountains and jungles, which encourages players to research their optional tech requirements more often.
• Eliminate Railroads!!! Unlimited movement ruins games. Since defenders can usually bring all their units instantly to face an attacking stack, military tactics after railroads are often reduced to a unit buildup followed by a single battle. Even worse, a surprise attack (usually amphibious) can lead to the collapse of an entire empire in a single turn, without giving the defender the chance to do anything about it.
• Factories give a 100% production bonus and require coal. To compensate for the loss of production from railroads, and for loss of significance of coal.
• Hospitals act as Granaries. To compensate for the loss of food from railroads.

This is obviously my own personal opinion, and I'm sure I have missed things. Feel free to shoot it down and take what you want from it.

I purposely stayed away from changes that are made just to make the game more fun. I think there are already too many important changes (i.e. to balance the MP game) even without adding 'fun' changes.